Introduction: Recent use of lasers for porcelain surface treatment for adhesion of brackets to restorations has not only showed some promising results, but is also accompanied with less undesirable effects among other advantages. The purpose of this study is the comparative electron microscope evaluation of feldspathic porcelain surfaces under irradiation by Neodymium-Doped Yttrium Aluminium Garnet (Nd:YAG) with different powers (0.75, 1.5 and 2W) via the acid etching with hydrofluoric acid (HF) technique.
Methods: The glazed porcelain samples were obtained by duplicating labial surfaces of maxillary central incisor teeth. The specimens were randomly treated by 4 different methods. Group1 was etched with hydrofluoric acid 9.6%. Samples in group 2 to 4 were also irradiated by Nd:YAG laser with different powers: 0.75, 1.5 and 2W. Then the samples were prepared for evaluation by scanning electron microscope (SEM).
Results: Etching quality from a porosity point of view was similar for group2 and HF group. Laser with power of 0.75W has little potential to create mechanical porosity.
Conclusion: In regard of the results of this study, it is possible to benefit from Nd:YAG laser with appropriate parameters for surface conditioning.
Schmage P, Nergiz I, Herrmann W, Ozcan M. Influence of various surface-conditioning methods on the bond strength of metal brackets to ceramic surfaces. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003; 123:540-6.
Eustaquio R, Garner LD, Moore BK. Comparative tensile strengths of brackets bonded to porcelain with orthodontic adhesive and porcelain repair systems. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988; 94:421-5.
Zachrisson BU, Buyukyilmaz T. Recent advances in bonding to gold, amalgam and porcelain. J Clin Orthod 1993; 27:661-75.
Gillis I, Redlich M. The effect of different porcelain conditioning techniques on shear bond strength of stainless steel brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998; 114:387-92.
Shahverdi S, Canay S, Sahin E, Bilge A. Effects of different surface treatment methods on the bond strength of composite resin to porcelain. J Oral Rehabil 1998; 25:699-705.
Cochran D, O’Keefe KL, Turner DT, Powers JM. Bond strength of orthodontic composite cement to treated porcelain. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997; 111: 297-300.
Smith GA, McInnes-Ledoux P, Ledoux WR, Weinberg R. Orthodontic bonding to porcelain: bond strength and refinishing. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988; 94: 245-52.
Poosti M, Jahanbin A, Mahdavi P, Mehrnoush S. Porcelain conditioning with Nd:YAG and Er:YAG laser for bracket bonding in orthodontics. Lasers Med Sci 2012; 27(2): 321-4.
Kim JT, Cho SA. The effects of laser etching on shear bond strength at the titanium ceramic interface. J Prosthet Dent 2009; 101:101-6.
Li R, Ren Y, Han J. [Effects of pulsed Nd:YAG laser irradiation on shear bond strength of composite resin bonded to porcelain]. Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 2000; 18:377–9. (Chinese)
Barbosa VLT, Almedia MA, Chevitarese O, Keith O. Direct bonding to porcelain. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995; 107:159-64.
Zachrisson YO, Zachrisson BU, Büyükyilmaz T. Surface preparation for orthodontic bonding to porcelain. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1996; 109:420–30.
Akova T, Yoldas O, Toroglu S, Uysal H. Porcelain surface treatment by laser for bracket-porcelain bonding. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Othop 2005; 128:630-7.
Uşümez S, Orhan M, Uşümez A. Laser etching of enamel for direct bonding with an Er,Cr:YSGG hydrokinetic laser system. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002;122: 649-56.
Rodríguez-Vilchis LE, Contreras-Bulnes R, Sánchez- Flores I, Samano EC. Acid resistance and structural changes of human dental enamel treated with Er:YAG laser. Photomed Laser Surg 2010;28:207-11.
Canay S, Hersek N, Etran A. Effect of different acid treatment on a porcelain surface. J Oral Rehabil 2001; 28:95-101.